School shooting in Finland

Dunkelheit

My point was - For Social Natural Selection to be true, the weaks should perish as if it were a natural phenomena like rotation of earth or the entropic disorder that just happens by itself without any human interference. It might be tempting to then say "but we are just animals, and only the strong ones survive in the wild." like the killer did, but If you want to strip yourself off 'humanity' that is innate in you and want to bring yourself down to the level of animals, you have to part yourself away from rationality too and without rationality in human beings, the whole idea of some people being more intelligent than others would simply not exist. His argument implodes on itself.

What I was trying to show you was that Humans are a part of nature. Natural selection isn't magic, it's competition between organisms for sustenance and procreation. I also don't ascribe to your notion that humans are somehow superior to all other animals and the rest of nature. While it is true that we most likely have the highest level of intellect and communication amongst animals, we are weaker than some animals in other aspects. Evolution does not produce "supreme" lifeforms, it rewards those which can adapt. A human is not "better" than a cactus, they both, however, have been able to adapt to their respective environmental pressures and survive. The dodo bird, isn't among them.. but that is not because of a lack of superiority but a lack of the ability to adapt to changing conditions. This is a nihilist website, drop the dualism in favor of objectively looking at what works and what doesn't and in which environments.

For my critique of Social-Darwinism, which in some ways coincides with yours. refer to my earlier post in response to you.

As far as rationality, one could argue that other animals are just as rational or irrational as humans depending on the situation. A lion sees a weak gazelle and realizes it presents an easy kill. At the same time a dog chases it's tail. A human confronts the cold, frosty, weather of the north, he builds shelter and clothing. Humans stop natural forest fires and thus allow more destructive fires to start which wipe out all of the forest along with the houses near it. At times humans are no smarter than the bacteria that eats their sweat.

I have no sympathy for this moron, only scorn; he is symptomatic of modern fatalism and nothing else. He is quick to criticize everything except himself - no capacity for self-discipline or the fostering of deeper spiritual capacities. He is a dull spirit trapped in a negative abstraction in his head, his own perspective divorced from reality. It doesn't matter how accurate aspects of your ideals may be if they cover your eyes like cataracts. He merely saw the world as instantiations of the generalizations in his mind, which fails to do justice to all that is hopeful, subtle, and inspiring in our world. I truly hope no one glorifies him.

What's the solution to the problems of the world? Viewing them clearly? Perhaps riding the tiger? Nope - just get rid of the species, no more problem! Brilliant. The bullet in his head thankfully counted when all was said and done.

Hah. Perhaps "the ugly truth" is too much for some people to handle. He should've just stuck with Rammstein and slasher films, and avoided philosophy. To say he was truly weak would be a massive understatement. His rashness prevented any positive change with his supposedly-clear perspectives on life...

His action wasn't fatalistic. What have any of us done to equal his accomplishment? Are not these events ringing bells to the more perceptive in our society? He was a one man pressure group taking direct action. I have no criticism of the man.

Logged

AttheGates1996

His action wasn't fatalistic. What have any of us done to equal his accomplishment? Are not these events ringing bells to the more perceptive in our society? He was a one man pressure group taking direct action. I have no criticism of the man.

What "accomplishment"? Anyone who avoids extremist bullshit thoughts like the ones he embraced has accomplished more in life than this fucker. These events are ringing bells, only to the fact that some twist their philosophy to be what they want and no longer base it on their original somewhat knowledgeable thoughts. To be a one man pressure group is nothing, anyone in this world could be a one man pressure group but it only takes a blind idiot to finally become one.

Today, I printed the ANUS article and put it on the bulletin board in my school next to the article about the shooting that was in the newspaper. Hope it will make at least one man think about at least the lying media, if not about the actual case of Auvinen.

What "accomplishment"? Anyone who avoids extremist bullshit thoughts like the ones he embraced has accomplished more in life than this fucker. These events are ringing bells, only to the fact that some twist their philosophy to be what they want and no longer base it on their original somewhat knowledgeable thoughts. To be a one man pressure group is nothing, anyone in this world could be a one man pressure group but it only takes a blind idiot to finally become one.

Are not these events ringing bells to the more perceptive in our society?

He was a one man pressure group taking direct action. I have no criticism of the man.

He accomplished -something- certainly. He felt humanity as a whole should be wiped out, and so he contributed to that end. Do we uphold the ideal that humanity should be wiped out? Do we hate life that much? If not, I fail to see how a few dead school children is any kind of accomplishment.

You might say that his media exposure will give exposure to the corrupt message. Perhaps negative media exposure is an accomplishment, but it's not -his- accomplishment. It's simply parasitically riding his actions.

He is absolutely a fatalist. He felt the world was corrupt in our special general sense of the term, which it is fair to say we all seem to believe to be true in some form or another, but he succumbed to the corruption. One might succumb to it by becoming a part of it (all the quiet television watching folks out there). He succumbed in a different way: he was driven to madness by it. He stared the tiger in the eyes and lashed out only to be swept away, leaving no greater enduring impression. The clearest evidence is the fact that he took his own life. This is clearly not a sensible act. You don't opt out of life if you have hope for the future. He obviously did not; the future is set in stone to an absolute degree for him. He was too dull, stubborn, and young to see the other sides of life.

Maybe we agree with the truth of some of his motives, but it does not follow that this act is the sensible action to take as a result of those motives.

These events are ringing bells, only to the fact that some twist their philosophy to be what they want and no longer base it on their original somewhat knowledgeable thoughts.

I think this is an important fact about this case to be recognized. He seemed to be perceptive to corrupt features of reality and had informed thoughts in the beginning, and then moved to extreme abstract ideals, but never came back down to earth to consider their consequences. The consequence was clearly fatal: his ideology led to his death and nothing else of enduring value.

There's a popular term used on these forums for ideals like that: Failure.

He accomplished -something- certainly. He felt humanity as a whole should be wiped out, and so he contributed to that end. Do we uphold the ideal that humanity should be wiped out? Do we hate life that much? If not, I fail to see how a few dead school children is any kind of accomplishment.

You might say that his media exposure will give exposure to the corrupt message. Perhaps negative media exposure is an accomplishment, but it's not -his- accomplishment. It's simply parasitically riding his actions.

He is absolutely a fatalist. He felt the world was corrupt in our special general sense of the term, which it is fair to say we all seem to believe to be true in some form or another, but he succumbed to the corruption. One might succumb to it by becoming a part of it (all the quiet television watching folks out there). He succumbed in a different way: he was driven to madness by it. He stared the tiger in the eyes and lashed out only to be swept away, leaving no greater enduring impression. The clearest evidence is the fact that he took his own life. This is clearly not a sensible act. You don't opt out of life if you have hope for the future. He obviously did not; the future is set in stone to an absolute degree for him. He was too dull, stubborn, and young to see the other sides of life.

Maybe we agree with the truth of some of his motives, but it does not follow that this act is the sensible action to take as a result of those motives.

I thought you people read Evola; what happened to riding the tiger?

It depended on how he thought he could best promote his own goals. Philosophy? Maybe he isn't that sharp, what else has he to add? Politics? Maybe he isn't a people person. Asymmetrical activism? Maybe those around him aren't worthy of time. Shoot a bunch of people and get out of life? Two birds with one stone, and it sure as hell screams out to more people. Why are we caring more about the loss of life and the loss of his life than what he might have accomplished?

I don't read Evola. Philosophy is a bore sometimes.

Logged

Septicemia

He seemed to be perceptive to corrupt features of reality and had informed thoughts in the beginning, and then moved to extreme abstract ideals, but never came back down to earth to consider their consequences.

I would expect very few people to be able to return to "the real world" after having reached such conclusions (which may have been, at the time, reached rationally or irrationally), taken them to heart, and live in today's world, attending high school. Teenagers, usually regardless of "IQ"/intellect, are extremely impressionable, and tends towards this sort of hormone-fueled irrationality. Expecting someone that has already reached purportedly misanthropic conclusions is probably going to self-destruct anyhow, both due to their character and the pronounced neurosis of our modern times.

I feel like a lot of the discussion in this thread seeks to label this event and this person as something necessarily "good" or "bad" (intellectually well-intentioned vs. moronic, confused vs. corrupted, etc.); the same thing has happened with regard to other current events and modern dilemmas, but most recently terrorism and Islam. The fact is, we KNOW that this is indicative of a growing phenomenon - and that this might provoke (global) society to recognize its flaws or it might not. If we nit-pick over every inconsequential little detail then it seems we only end up confusing ourselves or bickering rather than actually learning from each other.

Also, do you "not read" Evola, or just have never gotten around to it?

I've had Evola's reference to Riding the Tiger in my mind throughout this whole discussion. The article and the propaganda being spread by corrupt is trying to paint the shooter as sensible or heroic. I feel this is false. Evola criticizes the kind of nihilism that leads to this kind of random lashing out. The most sensible thing one can do is to ride the tiger until it is worn out. We must be strong enough to hold on in modern society, preserving within us Tradition and not being swept away by the current trends. Lashing out accomplishes nothing.

I don't think these are inconsequential little details. False claims are being made that can only distort the perception of what is believed to be true by corrupt/anus. That he would have been seen as heroic in any time is an insane thing to claim.

I don't doubt what you say about the inevitability of the shooting given his age and the ideology he held onto. That only supports that this was not a sensible thing to do, nor was it heroic in any way. He is not transcending anything; he is crumbling under the weight of his ideology.

Why I am persistent: This will not provoke society to recognize its flaws if those who are trying to get it to become more self-aware make crazy claims in the process. People are not totally stupid and will reject looking at themselves and their society if the voice telling them to take a look is making foolish claims for the sake of shocking people out of disillusionment. It will take on the tone of shock for the sake of shock and be forgotten.

I'm not going to run around trying to thwart your efforts. I am merely trying to point out something I see as problematic in the hopes of refining and focusing future efforts.

The kid's ideas about human extinction is commendable, plus he had the balls to take his own life instead of getting butt-fucked in jail.Think about it, what he said about the demise of homo sapiens is the next step towards human evolution. No more humans on earth, at least there would be no more nations, no more mtv, no more crappy metal albums, isn't that what Prozak is always talking about, only death is real. Now that is true nihilism. Maybe some of you in this forum who preach too much about upholding Hessian ideals should follow in this kid's footsteps. Start acting and stop bitching.